Towards Trans-species Social and Spatial Justice through Critical Animal Geographies, Anarchist Praxis and a Total Liberation ethic - SHURA
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Towards Trans-species Social and Spatial Justice through
Critical Animal Geographies, Anarchist Praxis and a Total
Liberation ethic.
WHITE, Richard
Available from Sheffield Hallam University Research Archive (SHURA) at:
http://shura.shu.ac.uk/26596/
This document is the author deposited version. You are advised to consult the
publisher's version if you wish to cite from it.
Published version
WHITE, Richard (2021). Towards Trans-species Social and Spatial Justice through
Critical Animal Geographies, Anarchist Praxis and a Total Liberation ethic. In: A
Research Agenda for Animal Geographies. Edward Elgar.
Copyright and re-use policy
See http://shura.shu.ac.uk/information.html
Sheffield Hallam University Research Archive
http://shura.shu.ac.ukTowards Trans-species Social and Spatial Justice through Critical Animal Geographies,
Anarchist Praxis and a Total Liberation ethic.
“I am vegan because I have compassion for animals; I see them as beings possessed
of value not unlike humans. I am an anarchist because I have that same compassion
for humans, and because I refuse to settle for compromised perspectives, half-assed
strategies and sold-out objectives. As a radical, my approach to animal and human
liberation is without compromise: total freedom for all, or else.”
(Dominick, 1997, n.p.)
Introduction
This chapter invites us to consider how critical animal geographies, anarchist praxis and a Total
Liberation ethics offer a means of urging and ensuring a more just trans-species praxis, one
which champions liberation and non-violent connections with all animals (human included).
Matsuoka and Sorenson's (2018, p. 15) defined trans-species social justice as, "social justice
beyond the limit of concern for human animals". It is important, however that “spatial”
geographies of justice are also given due recognition: trans-species violence is always deeply
embedded within time and space (see White and Springer, 2018). Thus, in addition to being
critically attentive to the why of trans-species (non) violence, or (in)justice as other disciplines are,
there is something of immeasurable value and significance to be gained by focusing on the "the
how and where of violence" (Springer, 2011, 90). Such attention is urgently needed. For, if nothing
else, the ongoing crises and precarity that dominate the Anthropocene epoch indicate with
absolute clarity and certainty that “we are at a critical point for the human species in its relations
with the rest of nature” (Cudworth and Hobden, 2018, p. 8)
The chapter is structured as follows. Firstly, a contextual discussion on what is understood by a
"critical" approach to animal studies and animal geographies will be given. This is intended elicit
a better understanding and appreciation of what these related approaches bring to addressing the
question of human and nonhuman animal injustice. The second section focuses more explicit on
anarchist geographies as a way of envisaging, engaging and enacting critical animal geographies.
1Given misrepresentations of anarchism in popular thought, a brief overview of anarchism and its
connections to radical geographies and animal liberation movements is made. From this,
emerging through anarchism’s emphasis on anti-hierarchicalism, prefigurative praxis and
intersectionality an appeal to a total Liberation ethics will be given. The final, third section
mindful of the concept and approaches foregrounded in the chapter, sketches out some research
themes that have the potential to make a particularly timely and relevant contribution to
knowledge. These include focusing on political economy and the animal industrial complex; doing
intersectionality, and trans-species education as direct action.
Critical Animal Studies and Critical Animal Geographies
“CAS, while scholarly, is opposed to much of what passes as scholarship and
teaching in academia. It does not feign neutrality or disinterest, but rather [advances]
an engaged scholarship that seeks to promote radical change.” (Nocella et.al. 2015,
p. 9).
The beginnings of a consciously "critical" approach to animal studies emerged in the mid-2000s
(Best et.al, 2007; Nocella et al, 2015). Within academia, Critical Animal Studies (CAS) emerged
out of a small group of American scholar-activists’ intense frustration and anger with the
perceived limitations of animal studies (AS) and mainstream animal studies (MAS). Among the
damning accusations levelled against MAS was its failure to produce scholarship that could
challenge the routine exploitation, violence that billions of other animals experience through the
actions of humans. One of the co-founders of CAS is Steve Best. Best went on to become of
most prominent, outspoken and influential voices both within the nascent field of critical animal
studies and across the landscape of animal rights and liberation in the decade that followed. It is
for these reasons that it is important to reflect on how he articulated the need for an explicit
"critical" animal scholarship to come to the fore:
2Against MAS, CAS seeks to illuminate problems and pose solutions through vivid,
concrete, and accessible language. It openly avows its explicit ethical and practical
commitment to the freedom of well-being of all animals and to a flourishing planet.
It opposes all forms of discrimination, hierarchy, and oppression as a complex of
problems to be extirpated from the root, not sliced off at the branch. It supports
civil disobedience, direct action, and economic sabotage. And it promotes bridge-
building and alliance politics as the means to promote the large-scale social
transformations that alone can free the continuum of animal life and the dynamic
natural world from the elite’s colonization and conquest and the building furies of
global climate change". (Best, 2009, p.12-13)
Before continuing it is acknowledge that the diversity of approaches within AS is such that the
boundaries between MAS and CAS do blur at certain points. Indeed there will be some excellent
'critical' animal studies scholarship that is being pursued by researchers who see themselves as
mainstream animal studies: (and indeed a similar scenario is repeated within between the
boundaries of animal geographies and critical animal geographies/vegan anarchist geographies)
and this is perfectly fine! As a rough indicator of whether research might be considered MAS or
CAS, it is worth applying Pedersen and Stănescu’s argument that CAS scholars shift the focus of
attention away from exploring the animal "question", towards the animal “condition”. They
define the animal condition as follow:
[The] actual life situation of most nonhuman animals in human society and culture,
as physically and emotionally experiences with its routine repertoire of violence,
deprivation, desperation, agony, apathy, suffering, and death. ((2012, p. ix)
Or, as Taylor and Twine (2014, 1) conclude: “CAS seeks to differentiate itself from the broader
AS [animal studies] field by having a direct focus on the circumstances and treatment of
animals.”
While fuzzy boundaries exists between aspects AS, MAS and CAS it is important to note that
CAS is not reducible to either. There is a visible and defendable space which 'critical animal
studies' is located, one which is reflected in the Ten Principles of CAS (see Figure 1).
Figure 1: “Ten Principles of Critical Animal Studies”
3Source: Institute for Critical Animal Studies (2016, p3)
Two things are worth drawing attention to in this figure. First is the reference to Ten Principles (as
opposed to Commandments). Critical Animal Studies is a complex, dynamic, unfolding space,
which simultaneously rejects any dogmatic statement “thou must!” . In terms of challenging
social injustice, CAS scholarship emphasises a need for both ‘theory’ and ‘practice’. As Pedersen
and Stănescu (2014, p.264) have argued, “critical” entails both a position of engagement and an
ongoing commitment:
For us, critical refers not only to engagement with critical theory, but equally a commitment to be
critical of anything that purports to study animals and at the same time fails to engage, support,
protect and stand with the animal herself. (emphasis in original)
This, positioning acts as a firm rebuttal of the notion that any person can be fully-signed up ‘card
carrying’ CAS scholar. Recognition as a CAS scholar comes through the type of critical
scholarship and the commitment to activism that is pursued.
4A second important point to emphasise from the beginning is an openness to actively seek out
and promoting dialogue with other critical discourses. As Best et al (2007, 2) argued it is only:
Through – and only through — new paradigms of ecopedagogy, bridge-building
with other social movements, and a solidarity-based alliance politics, is it possible to
build the new forms of consciousness, knowledge, social institutions that are
necessary to dissolve the hierarchical society that has enslaved this planet for the last
ten thousand years.
CAS in this sense draws great strength and verve from its diversity, and has been animated by a
number of critical and intersectional perspectives. A number of critical and radical approaches
run deeply within CAS. Anarchist praxis, for example has been highly influential (Nocella, et.al.,
2015). Elsewhere other substantial interventions continue to draw on feminism (Kemmerer,
2011), ecofeminism (Adams, 1991) and animal ecofeminism (see also Corman and Vandrovcová,
2014). More recently, new disciplinary advances that have incorporated a CAS perspective
include historical archaeology (Sayer and Uehlein, 2018; political science (Hamilton, 2018); and
psychology (Hodson and Costello, 2018)
A clear desire running through the rich tapestries woven through CAS scholar-activist research
has been to articulate and agitate more effectively for trans-species social justice. Yet, as Springer,
(2012, 1593) rightly argues
"Social transformation is, of course, necessarily a spatial project, and a spatial
dimension to the effective critique of existing structures is an important element of
imagining and forging spaces for new ones."
With exceptions (e.g. Salter, 2015) it is the ‘spatial’ awareness; of the importance of interrogating
the spaces and place where animal (ab)use occurs, that has largely been overlooked or
underplayed within CAS scholarship (White and Springer, 2018). This is certainly a significant
gap where critical animal geographers (CAG) are exceptionally well-placed to address. However,
5before continuing further it is worth explaining might be understand by the “critical” in animal
geography.
I have argued elsewhere (White 2015) that there are striking parallels between the call for a self-
consciously critical animal studies to take root, and Wolch and Emel’s (1998, p. xi) impassioned
plea for geographers to recognise the plight of nonhuman animals in their research:
The plight of animals worldwide has never been more serious than it is today. Each
year, by the billions, animals are killed in factory farms; poisoned by toxic pollutants
and waste; driven from their homes by logging, mining, agriculture, and
urbanization; dissected, re-engineered, and used as spare body-parts; and kept in
captivity and servitude to be discarded as soon as their utility to people has waned.
The reality is mostly obscured by the progressive elimination of animals from
everyday human experience, and by the creation of a thin veneer of civility
surrounding human-animal relations, embodied largely by language tricks, isolation
of death camps, and food preparation routines that artfully disguise the true origins
of flesh-food. Despite the efforts made to minimize human awareness of animal
lives and fates, however, the brutality of human domination over the animal world
and the catastrophic consequences of such dominionism are everywhere evident.
This ‘critical’ intervention has been framed as part of a ‘third-wave’ of animal geographies. CAG
is seen as being distinct from previous waves, where researchers often uncritically upheld and
perpetuated dominant, speciesist, anthropocentric "human-animal" norms in their research
approach and analysis (see Collard and Gillespie, 2017).Within CAS multiple, intersecting critical
and radical geographies have begun to gather momentum and make significant contributions to
this emerging, unfolding and dynamic 'project'. Over the last two decades arguably the most
prominent an important contributions here drawn on feminist approaches and analyses (see
Birke, 2002). Some key themes here range from to animal rights and feminist environmentalism
(Seager, 2003); sex, gender and the commodification of other-than-human bodies (Gillespie,
2013); to exploring interspecies relation though intersectionality, performativity and standpoint
(Hovorka, 2015). Other decisive interventions have come/ are coming from postcolonial
feminist studies (e.g. Gaard, 2013) and critical feminist race scholars (Gunderman, 2018),
6particularly Amie Breeze Harper (Harper, 2009, 2010). Another key radical geography:
anarchism is also of increasing relevance here, and this will be focused on in more detail shortly.
To summarise, CAG place a strong emphases on the importance of spaces of justice/ injustice,
paying close attention to "explore how violence depends in part on specific spatial
arrangement… as critical animal geographies we are not only interested in the animal condition,
but also in thinking about how 'the human' and 'the animal' are themselves social and spatial
orders." (Collard and Gillespie, 2017, p. 10). A critical intervention into CAS scholarship can be
seen in the way CAGs seek to encourage CAS scholars to focus greater attention on the question
posed by Collard and Gillespie (2017, 8): "How can we more justly share space?" Moving forward
a worthwhile area of research would be one that has the intention of building more robust
bridges between CAS and CAG body/ies of literature, though taking up the challenge to of
calling for trans-species social and spatial justice (White and Springer, 2018). It is in response to
this that the chapter now makes a call for anarchist geographies and a total liberation ethic.
Anarchist Geographies and a Total Liberation Ethic
Anarchism has enjoyed great influential across many radical forms of protest and resistance
movement that have fought for freedom and liberty for all life: human, nonhuman or the earth.
This is certainly evident in contemporary social justice movement: indeed there has been a
resurgence of anarchist thought and practice in recent decades. For example, in the late 1990s,
Brian Dominick (1997, n.p.) argued that
“…many vegans and animal liberationists are being influenced by anarchist thought
and its rich tradition. This is evidenced by growing hostility among some animal lib
activists towards the statist, capitalist, sexist, racist and ageist Establishment which
has been escalating the intensity of its war not only on non-human animals, but also
on their human advocates. The relatively new community of animal liberationists is
rapidly becoming aware of the totality of force which fuels the speciesist machine
that is modern society. As such awareness increases, so should the affinity between
animal liberationists and their more socially-oriented counterparts, the anarchists.
7Unsurprisingly, anarchist approaches have enjoyed tremendous visibility within CAS, not least as
both share a common commitment to "explore the origins and consequences of varied forms of
inequality and hierarchy, and resolve to oppose them at every level.” (Pellow, 2015, p. 2). This
exciting and vibrant resurgence can also be seen within critical geography, which is increasingly
“re-turning” toward anarchist thoughts and principles (Springer et al. 2012; Springer et al. 2016;
de Souza et al, 2016; White et al. 2016). The emphasis on returning is important, as many
students of the discipline are surprised to learn that the "beautiful geographies of anarchism"
(Springer, 2016 1) were burning brightly well over a hundred years ago. This was particularly
evident in the tremendous body/ies of work emerging from Peter Kropotkin (1842-1921) and
Élisée Reclus (1830-1905) (see Ferretti, 2017). Crucially both Kropotkin (Mutual Aid, 1902) and
Reclus (On Vegetarianism, 1901) drew attention to the questions of inter-species justice and
solidarity. Indeed as Clark and Martin, (2013, 7) note, Reclus's writings were intended to "prepare
the way for a world in which all forms of domination - all "mastery" - would be abolished, so
that humanity could live in a free community of equals founded on such a practice of active,
engaged love and compassion".
Regrettably though many people – not least those within academia! - still instinctively recoil at
the very mention of "anarchy" or "anarchism"; these terms conjuring up nihilistic riotous worlds
of violence, chaos and disorder. Nothing, to reassure, could be further from the truth of what
anarchists are, and what anarchism represents! While it is important to recognise that anarchism
has embraced/ been embraced by other radical approaches, e.g. anarcha-feminism (Veron and
White, forthcoming) anarchists differentiate and push beyond other critical and radical
approaches in several ways. For example, anarchists consistently oppose and strive to dismantle
“all systems and forms of archy (i.e, hierarchy, patriarchy, monarchy, adultarchy, oligarchy,
anthroparchy, etc.)” (Springer, 2016, 43). As Bookchin (1989, p.271) notes:
8"Above all, the anti-hierarchicalism that is associated with anarchism, particularly its
move recently developed eco-anarchist forms, and its broader appeals to dominated
people - women, ethnic groups, the elderly, and the dispossessed - rather than
strictly to the proletariat, from the theoretical premises that cohere various
tendencies, groups, and regionally based movements into a broad category that can
be called 'new social movements'. The all-important conviction that freedom can be
attained not merely if classes are abolished but if hierarchy in all its forms disappears
brings ecology into accord with feminism and feminism into accord with a
community conceived as a new ethical as well as functional dispensation of social
life. The principle that unites these seemingly independent movements is the notion
of participation and mutual aid - not only between municipalities but in the
biosphere and between men and women.”
The absence of archy opens up the possibilities for richer, more colourful and joyous lines of
expressions of freedom and autonomy to emerge and flourish. To these ends anarchists advocate
direct democracy, and ways organising that are non-hierarchical, non-coercive and non-violent,
such as those seen through collectivism, volunteerism, and mutual aid (see Franks et.al. 2018). It
is worth worth noting great many examples of how we conduct ourselves, and how we engage
with other, is consistent with anarchist principles; it is certainly illustrated by many people who
would not ordinarily consider themselves to be anarchist (see Parker et.al., 2020)!
A second way anarchists differ from other ‘radical approaches’ (e.g. Marxism) come through
opposing the unhelpful ontological divide that seeks to separate ‘theory/ reflection’ on the one
hand, and ‘practice’ on the other is. An anarchist approach seeks to dissolves this gap, fusing,
binding and uniting theory and practice through an appeal to praxis. As de Souza (2016, p. 7)
contends: “Theory is something politically crucial, provided it is intimately connected with
practice in the context of praxis.”
Another core anarchist concept is the appeal to a prefigurative praxis. Indeed, as Ince (2019,
p.151) notes:
“(It) is the distinctively prefigurative underpinnings of anarchism that exert
potentially the most powerful impact on academic endeavour. The notion that we
must organize and relate to one another in ways that are reflective of the kind of
future world we wish to create.”
9The emphasis on ‘we’ here is critical, insofar as it places a central emphasis on direct action in
the here and now to address the injustice that we see in the/ our world. Anarchist and anarchist
geographers argue that there is no waiting for the opportune or ideal moment to act in some
undetermined future. Rather an anarchist praxis encourages a revolution of the everyday, one
that is conscious, continuous and ongoing.
A radical commitment to intersectional praxis, animates an anarchist appeal for a unified ‘Total
Liberation’ ethics (Anonymous, 2019) or Total Liberation Ecology (Springer, forthcoming) to
take root. In appealing for a politics of total liberation, Best (2014, xiii) refers:
“to the process of understanding human, animal, and earth liberation movements in
relation to one another and building bridge around interrelated issues such as
democracy and ecology, sustainably and veganism, and social justice and animal
rights…. Human, animal and earth liberation movements are different components
of one inseparable struggle – against hierarchy, domination and unsustainable social
forms – not of which is possible without the others.”
Emphasising and extending many of this core points Pellow maintains that:
“…one cannot fully grasp the foundations of racism, classism, sexism, patriarchy,
ageism, and ableism without also understanding speciesism and dominionism
because they are all ideologies and practices rooted in hierarchy and the creation of
oppositional superior and inferior subjects. This total liberation framework links
oppression and privileges across species, ecosystems, and human populations,
suggesting a theory and path toward justice and freedom – something missing in
traditional models of intersectionality. Thus the concept of total liberation reveals
both the complexity of various systems of hierarchy while also suggesting points of
intervention, transformative chance, solidarity and coalition building across myriad
boundaries.” (Pellow, 2015, 2-3)
As critical animal geographers we would certainly include reference to a ‘spatial’ liberation as
integral to this praxis.
Before contemplating future questions for researching it should be emphasised that one of the
most important, and widely enacted forms of direct action that CAS, CAG scholar-activists
embrace in their everyday lives is through veganism. Indeed a tremendously exciting new area of
10CAG scholarship is currently coalescing around “Vegan Geographies” (see White et al.,
forthcoming). Certainly many anarchist have embraced a critical vegan praxis. Indeed the term
“veganarchism” was coined by Brian Dominik in the mid-1990s. For Dominick (1997, n.p.)
“veganism is the conscious abstinence from actions which contribute, directly or indirectly, to
the suffering of sentient beings, be they animals or humans, for ethical reasons.” While mindful
of different opportunities that present themselves, and my position as a UK citizen, I would
argue the where choice exists then one of the great expressions of non-violence, of inter-species
‘anarchy in action’ is to be vegan. This not only is a statement of intent that rejects the
intentional suffering of other animals for food or for their milk, but also acknowledges of the
intrinsic violence, brutality and exploitation that humans endure when caught up in key spaces of
animal violence, particularly the slaughterhouse or abattoir (White, 2018).
While many CAS/ CAG scholars embrace veganism as a core practice, there are obviously a
great many other scholar-activists who might choose a different critical praxis, and who actively
choose not to be vegan. I think many of us can name prominent individuals who certainly match
this description; they engage in vital research and activism, but won’t ‘go there’ ie. go vegan.
Personally speaking about those I am recalling here, I experience a profound disappointment,
‘how can you know what you know and still it’s not enough. As always, there is much to be
potentially to gained in trying to seek common ground, and constructive engagement. It is also
important that this is reflected in ‘our’ collective work, to think carefully about who we would
like our audience to be, and how can we help raise consciousness through our teaching, research
and writing that does allows us to maintain an open dialogue.
However, that said, engaging with academic communities who are indifferent or indeed hostile
to the grounds upon which CAS/ CAG stands upon does not diminish or negate the need for
spaces for explicitly CAS/ CAG scholars, activist and public communities to come together. I
would encourage any researcher looking to become more involved with CAS/ CAG to look
11engage with the North American Conference for Critical Animal Studies, Critical Geography
Conference, Students for Critical Animal Studies, and the Conference of the European
Association for Critical Animal Studies. As well as being welcoming and supportive great places
to engage with others, hey can also be vital in offering spaces of solidarity and support. This
might be particularly important for those who find their CAS/ CAG research agendas are not
reflected in their wider Department and/ or the find their commitment to veganism is not
reflected or supported by their wider peer groups within and beyond the academy.
Ideas for Future Research and Scholarship Agendas
The influence of anarchism within inter-species social and spatial justice movements continues
push back existing boundaries of knowledge and understanding in ever new and exciting ways.
Committing to a research agenda that aims to raise consciousness and awareness about the plight
of other animals can be an exhilarating and creative venture. There is such momentum and
interested developing around CAS/ CAG generally, and vegan geographies specifically that it is
an opportune time to think about how your research agenda can help continue developing and
deepening this further into the future.
The emphasis made earlier placed on prefigurative praxis, on starting from where you are in the
world, should be empowering when thinking about the ‘where’ of research. Thinking closely
about your everyday lived realities, and how these are entangled with other trans-species relations
and communities for example. How might these socio-spatial relationships through up ethical
themes or questions, when considering geographies of justice/ injustice. In other words, research
does not need to begin ‘elsewhere’ and involve ‘others’. Rather, everywhere becomes a
potentially important potential site of engagement, be it home, work, and university - and all
those other key spaces in between!
12There are many important research agendas that CAS, CAG and vegan anarchist geographies are
pushing forward at this moment in time. I will just highlight three in particular. One of these
certainly includes paying closer attention to better understand and articulate complex
geographies of political economy more fully. How, for example does capitalism animate and
operate - at all scales – within the animal industrial complex (A-IC)? The A-IC being understood
here as:
“partly opaque and multiple set of networks and relationships between the corporate
(agricultural) sector, governments, and public and private science. With economic,
cultural, social and affective dimensions it encompasses an extensive range of
practices, technologies, images, identities and markets. (Twine, 2012, pg.23)
How can a deeper understanding here apply to a Total Liberation ethics and the intent to
transgress the ongoing commodification of life, and end these violent geographies (Anonymous,
2019)? How can we begin to better imagine, envisage and enact “post-capitalist” trans-species
futures?
A second key line of research would be one focusing on intersectional geographies of activism
within Total Liberation Movements. To talk about intersectionality and social justice is one
thing, but how to take this out ‘on the streets’ often proves an intensely problematic area of
contestation and conflict, and which often falls ways short of expectations (see Socha,
forthcoming). How should Total Liberation activists/ vegan geographers, look to express
solidarity with other social movements? In an interview with Mickey Z for World New Trust
(2015) Amy Breeze Harper posed a number of searching questions; questions which are as
relevant today as they were then: “How do veganism and #blacklivesmatter intersect? What does
a vegan praxis of “black lives matter” look like? What does veganism that ignores “Black lives
matter” look like, and what are the unintended consequences? Why do race and whiteness
matter, and how do they operate within veganism and beyond?”
13A third line of research would be to think about the importance of education - a central themes
in anarchist geographies (see Suissa, 2019). There must be an unequivocal belief (else what’s the
point in writing and reading this chapter, or of undertaking research at all) that raising
consciousness toward can be a catalyst for change. As the anarchist Peter Marshall (1989, p. 141)
said:
“It is our consciousness which sets us free. Because consciousness is intentional we
can become aware of and understand the influences at work on us… Between
ourselves and the world, there is a gap in which we can say 'no'.”
How can therefore think about speaking and writing as key forms of direct action, and improve
the relevance, impact and effectiveness of these? The act of encouraging people to think about
trans-species injustice, and raise awareness around the intersectional geographies of violence and
injustice, is an extremely powerful – potentially transformative - thing to do. In ‘The Dreaded
Comparison’, Speigel (1988, p. 92) touched upon this:
"The realization that the animals we enslave, the animals we turn into things, the
animals who slave for us that we might eat some luxury from their bodies, are alive,
are as possessive of their lives as you or I, this realization would throw a wrench into
the system. If this realization were reaches, people would have to change an aspect
of their lifestyle. And this is why many people resist rethinking about it, resist
questioning the system, and fail to know the obvious. Which greatly pleases the
slave-owners, those who directly profit from the lives of animals and from our passive
and active acceptance of slavery and oppression. For if individuals did question it,
and refused to participate any longer, the system would collapse.”
Focusing new CAG research around core concepts and ideologies such as speciesism, carnism
and anthroparchy exploring: “how” these intersect with other forms of oppression (sexism,
racism, classism); and “where” these manifest themselves in different spaces offer important
contribution to knowledge. I’ve taken much satisfaction from focusing my “students” (co-
learners) attention to these, and other reflections through in my critical animal geographies class
and seeing the impact that this has had (White, 2019b). Each year for example, several students
taking the class will go then go vegan, feel empowered to encourage similar similar conversations
14in their wider family and friendship groups, and some have also engaged directly with wider
expression of trans-species forms of activism and protest (Hinchcliffe and White, forthcoming).
To come back to the initial point though: how can we keep pushing back current frontiers of
knowledge and understanding about trans-species social and spatial injustices and communicate these
in ways that make our activism more effective and inclusive, and our arguments more visible and
persuasive.
These are just a few considered thoughts and suggestions. Ultimately, as an anarchist geographer
I neither desire nor think it possible to point to any pre-determined revolutionary blue-prints or
set sail by a singular ‘map’ to pursuit of Total Liberation praxis. Instead a more open and
complex imaginary should come encouraged to come to fore; one coupled with the certainty that
we – and our research – have powerful roles to play in bringing forward the emancipatory
futures that we hope to see prosper, for all.
References
Adams, C.J. (1991), Ecofeminism and the Eating of Animals. Hypatia, 6, 125-145.
Anonymous (2019), Total Liberation. London, UK: Signal Fire.
Best, S. (2015), The Politics of Total Liberation: Revolution for the 21st Century. London: Routledge.
Best, S. A.J. Nocella, R. Kahn, C. Gigliotti and L. Kemmerer (2007), ‘Introducing Critical
Animal Studies’. Journal for Critical Animal Studies, 5(1), 4-5.
Best, S. (2009), 'The Rise of Critical Animal Studies: Putting Theory into Action and Animal
Liberation into Higher Education', Journal of Critical Animal Studies, VII(I), 9-52.
Birke, L. (2002), ‘Intimate familiarities? Feminism and human-animal studies’. Society and Animals,
10(4), 429-436.
Bookchin, M. (1989), 'New Social Movements', in D. Goodway (eds), For Anarchism. History,
Theory, and Practice. London: Routledge. pp. 259-275.
Clark, J. and C. Martin (2013), 'The Earth Story, the Human Story' in J. Clark and C. Martin (ed)
Anarchy, geography, modernity: selected writings of Elisée Reclus. Edinburgh. PM Press.
Cherry, E. (2016), Culture and activism: Animal rights in France and the United States. London:
Routledge.
15Corman, L., & Vandrovcová, T. (2014), ‘Radical Humility: Toward a More Holistic Critical
Animal Studies Pedagogy’. Counterpoints, 448, 135-157.
Cudworth, E. and Hobden, S. (2018), The Emancipatory Project of Posthumanism. London: Routledge.
Dominick, B.A. (1997), Animal Liberation and Social Revolution: A vegan perspective on anarchism or an
anarchist perspective on veganism, accessed 6 June 2020 at
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/brian-a-dominick-animal-liberation-and-social-
revolution .
Franks, B., N. Jun., and L. Williams (2018), Anarchism: a conceptual approach. London: Routledge.
Ferretti, F. (2017), Evolution and revolution: Anarchist geographies, modernity and
poststructuralism. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 35(5), 893-912.
Gaard, G. (2013), ‘Toward a Feminist Postcolonial Milk Studies’. American Quarterly, 64. (3) pp.
595-618.
Gillespie, K. (2014), ‘Sexualized violence and the gendered commodification of the animal body
in Pacific Northwest US dairy production’. Gender, Place & Culture, 21(10), 1321-1337.
Gunderman, H.C. (2018), ‘Intersectional Scholar–Activism: Seeing Human and Nonhuman
Animal Struggles through the Lenses of Social Issues’. Society & Animals, 26 (3), 331-334.
Harper, A.B., (2009), Sistah vegan: Black female vegans speak on food, identity, health, and society. Lantern
Books.
Harper, A.B., (2010), Race as a ‘feeble matter’ in veganism: Interrogating whiteness, geopolitical
privilege, and consumption philosophy of ‘cruelty-free’ products’, Journal for critical animal
studies, 8 (3), 5-27.
Harper, A.B., (2016), ‘Doing veganism differently: Racialized trauma and the personal journey
towards vegan healing’, in A. Hayes-Conroy and J. Hayes-Conroy (eds). Doing Nutrition
Differently. Critical Approaches to Diet and Dietary Intervention. London: Routledge. pp. 133-
150).
Hinchcliffe, A. and White RJ. (forthcoming) ‘Bearing Witness to The Animal Condition:
exploring the complex motivations, experiences and coping-strategies of Sheffield Save
Movement Activists, UK’. In. A. Nocella, K. Socha and R.J. White (eds) Critical Animal
Studies in Activism: Global Perspectives on Total Liberation and Intersectionality.
Hovorka, A. J. (2015), ‘The Gender, Place and Culture Jan Monk Distinguished Annual Lecture:
Feminism and animals: exploring interspecies relations through intersectionality,
performativity and standpoint’, Gender, Place & Culture, 22 (1), 1-19.
Ince, A. (2019), ‘Black Flag Mapping. Emerging themes in Anarchist Geography’, in C. Levy and
S. Newman (eds) The Anarchist Imagination. Anarchism Encounters the Humanities and the Social
Sciences. London: Routledge.
Institute for Critical Animal Studies (2016) Ten Principles of Critical Animal Studies (available at
http://www.criticalanimalstudies.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/ICAS-Handout-
2016.pdf [last accessed 27.09.2019])
Joy, M. (2010), Why We Love Dogs, Eat Pigs and Wear Cows: an Introduction to Carnism. San
Francisco. Conari Press.
16Kemmerer, L. (ed) (2011). Sister species: Women, animals and social justice. Illinois, University of
Illinois Press.
Kropotkin, P. (1902) Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution. New York: McClure Phillips & Co.
Marshall, P. (1989), 'Human Nature and Anarchism', in D. Goodway For Anarchism. History,
Theory, and Practice. London: Routledge. pp. 127-149.
Matsuoka, A. and Sorenson, J. (2018), ‘Introduction’, in A. Matsuoka and J. Sorenson (eds)
Critical Animal studies: Towards Trans-species Social Justice. Rowman and Littlefield: London.
Nocella, A.J, White, R.J. and Cudworth, E. (2015), ‘Introduction’ in A.J. Nocella, R.J.White and
E. Cudworth (ed,) Anarchism and Animal Liberation: Essays on Complementary Elements of
Total Liberation. Jefferson: McFarland & Company.
Parker, M. Konstantin, S, and Thomas Swann, T. (2020). Anarchism, Organization and Management:
Critical Perspectives for Students. London: Routledge.
Pedersen, H. and Stănescu, V, (2012). ‘What is "Critical" about Animal Studies? From the
Animal "Question" to the Animal "Condition"’ in K. Socha. Women, Destruction, and the
Avant-Garde: A Paradigm for Animal Liberation. New York: Rodophi Press:
Pedersen, H. and Stănescu, V (2014). ‘Conclusion: Future Directions for Critical Animal Studies’.
In N. Taylor and R. Twine (eds). The Rise of Critical Animal Studies: From the Margins to the
Centre. London: Routledge, pp. 262–276.
Pellow, David. (2015) ‘Foreword’ in A.J. Nocella, R.J. White and E. Cudworth (ed), Anarchism
and Animal Liberation: Essays on Complementary Elements of Total Liberation. McFarland &
Company, Jefferson. pp. 1-3.
Reclus, E. (1902 [2009]) On Vegetarianism. Accessed 6 June 2020 at
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/elisee-reclus-on-vegetarianism
Salter, C. (2015). ‘The animal question and condition: intersectionality and Critical Animal
Studies in the Asia-Pacific’, Animal Studies Journal, 4(1), 1-11.
Seager, J., (2003), ‘Pepperoni or broccoli? On the cutting wedge of feminist environmentalism’.
Gender, Place and Culture: A Journal of Feminist Geography, 10, (2), 167-174.
Socha, K. (forthcoming) ‘Animal Rights, White Fragility, and the Appropriation of
Intersectionality’, in A.J. Nocella, K. Socha and R.J. White (ed) Critical Animal Studies in
Action. SUNY Press.
Souza, M.L. de (2016), ‘Introduction. Subverting the Meaning of Theory’, in M.L. Souza, R.J.
White and S. Springer (eds.) Theories of Resistance: Anarchism, Geography and the Spirit of
Revolt, Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.
Souza, M. L. de, White RJ., Springer, S. (eds) (2016), Theories of Resistance: Anarchism, Geography and
the Spirit of Revolt, Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.
Spiegel, M. (1988), The Dreaded Comparison: An Historical Understanding. London: Heretic Books.
Springer, S. (2011), Violence sits in places? Cultural practice, neoliberal rationalism, and virulent
imaginative geographies. Political Geography, 30, (2), 90-98.
17Springer, S. (2016). The anarchist roots of geography: Toward spatial emancipation. University of
Minnesota: Minnesota Press.
Springer, S. (forthcoming). Total Liberation Ecology: Integral Anarchism, Anthroparchy, and the
Violence of Indifference. In Vegan Geographies.
Springer, S, White RJ, Souza, ML de. 2016 (eds.) The Radicalization of Pedagogy: Anarchism,
Geography and the Spirit of Revolt, Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.
Springer, S., Ince, A., Pickerill, J., Brown, G., & Barker, A. J. (2012). Reanimating anarchist
geographies: A new burst of colour. Antipode, 44 (5), 1591-1604.
Springer, S. (forthcoming) ‘Total Liberation Ecology: Integral Anarchism, Anthroparchy, and the
Violence of Indifference’ in S. Springer, J. Mateer, and M. Locret-Collet (eds). Undoing
Human Supremacy Anarchist Political Ecology in the Face of Anthroparchy
Suissa, J. (2019) Anarchism and education studies. In C. Levy and S. Newman (eds), The Anarchist
Imagination. Anarchism Encounters the Humanities and the Social Sciences. London: Routledge.
Taylor, N. and Twine, R. (2014) ‘Introduction: Locating the “critical” in critical animal studies’.
In N. Taylor and R. Twine (eds) The Rise of Critical Animal Studies. London: Routledge.
Twine, R. (2012). ‘Revealing the ‘animal-industrial complex—A concept and method for critical
animal studies’. Journal for Critical Animal Studies, 10 (1), 12-39.
Veron, 0. and White R.J. (forthcoming) ‘Anarchism, Feminism and Veganism: A Convergence of
Struggles’. In S. Springer, J. Mateer, M. Locret-Collet and M. Acker (ed) Anarchist Political
Ecology – Undoing Human Supremacy.
White R.J. (2015) 'Critical animal geographies and anarchist praxis: shifting perspectives from the
animal ‘question’ to the animal ‘condition’”, in K Gillespie and R-C Collard (eds) Critical
Animal Geographies: Power, Space and Violence in a Multispecies World. Routledge: London. pp.
19-35.
White R.J., S. Springer and M.L. de Souza, (eds) (2016), The Practice of Freedom: Anarchism,
Geography and the Spirit of Revolt, Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.
White R.J. (2018), ‘Articulating a “Yes, BUT…!” response to lifestyle veganism, and outlining
post-capitalist futures in critical veganic agriculture’. Europe Now
http://www.europenowjournal.org /.
White, RJ. (2019a). Problematizing Non-violent “Terrorism” in an Age of True Terror: A focus
on the anarchist dimensions of the Earth Liberation Front IN. A.J. Nocella, S. Parson,
A.E.George and S. Eccles. (ed) A Historical Scholarly Collection of Writings on the Earth
Liberation Front. Peter Lang: Oxford.
White R.J. (2019b) ‘We Are One Lesson: Some Reflections on Teaching Critical Animal
Geographies within the university’, in A.J. Nocella, C. Drew, A.E. George, S. Ketenci, J.
Lupinacci, I. Purdy and J.L. Schatz (ed) Education for Total Liberation: Critical Animal
Pedagogy and Teaching Against Speciesism Oxford: Peter Lang.
White, R.J. P. Hodge, A. McGregor, S.Springer and O, Veron. (Forthcoming) Vegan Geographies:
Spaces Beyond Violence, Ethics Beyond Speciesism
18Winter, D. (2015) ‘Doing Liberation’.in A.J. Nocella, R.J. White and E. Cudworth (eds),
Anarchism and Animal Liberation: Essays on Complementary Elements of Total Liberation.
Jefferson: McFarland & Company, pp. 59-70.
Wolch, J.R. and L. Emil (ed) (1998), Animal Geographies: Place, Politics, and Identity in the
Natureculture Borderlands, London: Verso Books:
World News Trust (2015). #BlackLivesMatter, Veganism, & Intersectionality | Mickey Z. An
Interview with A.Breeze Harper. Available at (https://worldnewstrust.com/blacklivesmatter-
veganism-intersectionality-mickey-z [last accessed 09.06.2020]).
19You can also read
